Do diesels make financial sense?

As is said, from who's prospective do you look at things? Many of you like myself will do one thing from one prospective, as it makes more sense. IE the gas rig in my example. Or which ever is cheaper from how one needs that tool/truck whatever.
Argue all you want. Sometimes one needs th o look at it from multiple sides.
Are you an RV person, or business. Leading buying gas, diesel, propane, lpg, rwd, 4wd....from person vs business, it does not have to make sense personal. Businesses it does.
Marty

Ps back to the top sticky!

If I were CFO of a company, I wouldn't buy an RV....losing proposition from the get go.

If I were a CFO of a company, of course I would pick the cheaper of the two, but I would also probably keep them longer than 2 years/50K miles, but that depends on the maintenance contract etc...

We're talking privately owned tow vehicles, I believe. And in that case, financial sense doesn't have as big of an impact. It's more about what you want, and can you afford what you want.. regardless if it makes financial sense.

If you were in a position to buy a lamborghini, and could afford it, would that make fiscal sense? Would you care?

For some, they may feel the need to justify their purchase from a fiscal perspective. If that's who you are, more power to you. If you are in a position to buy what you want, when you want, then that's great too!. Im in the latter, and feel just fine about it. I only have one other person I have to justify my purchases to.

Mike

blt2ski wrote:
Hmmmm, as CFO of xyz company, I need to lease 100 pickup for 2 yrs a d 50,000 miles of driving per pickup. Cost for on engine version is $.45 per mile, other .51 per mile. Lower per mile cost is a gas rig, higher diesel. Both will do the job, same amount of hours time etc. Be honest, which will you choose? That is a $300,000 difference in cost over the 2 year time frame and need.

Marty

This is not a forum for CFO's for companies needing many vehicles. If it was, then my decision would also include lease vs purchase. And if I was that CFO, sure I would probably go with the lower cost per mile. I certainly wouldn't equip the trucks with heated leather seats, etc. Then I'd hire a bunch of young drivers and not care a flip how they felt at the end of each work day.

As a 70 YO individual owner/operator with a single truck I might make a different decision. RV ownership isn't about making a profit.

blt2ski wrote:
Hmmmm, as CFO of xyz company, I need to lease 100 pickup for 2 yrs a d 50,000 miles of driving per pickup. Cost for on engine version is $.45 per mile, other .51 per mile. Lower per mile cost is a gas rig, higher diesel. Both will do the job, same amount of hours time etc. Be honest, which will you choose? That is a $300,000 difference in cost over the 2 year time frame and need.
If it were the other....Which would you choose?
Some of you can say all you want about spread sheets...One thing when it is your money as CFO of rv.net member 1234. But as a CFO of company that has to answer to stock holders.......Which you may be one.....
Answer us the one with lower cost per mile!

Initial. Most of a diesel etc in this sense, does not make sence/cents!

Marty

Pretty simple, fire the nincompoop that decided to:
Lease trucks; toss them after 2 years, and only operate them for 50,000 miles.

Hmmmm, as CFO of xyz company, I need to lease 100 pickup for 2 yrs a d 50,000 miles of driving per pickup. Cost for on engine version is $.45 per mile, other .51 per mile. Lower per mile cost is a gas rig, higher diesel. Both will do the job, same amount of hours time etc. Be honest, which will you choose? That is a $300,000 difference in cost over the 2 year time frame and need.
If it were the other....Which would you choose?
Some of you can say all you want about spread sheets...One thing when it is your money as CFO of rv.net member 1234. But as a CFO of company that has to answer to stock holders.......Which you may be one.....
Answer us the one with lower cost per mile!

Initial. Most of a diesel etc in this sense, does not make sence/cents!

Marty

dodge guy wrote:
Tell that to the guy in the Diesel super C that couldn't pass me in WY last year! he tried, but settled in behind me for 5 miles up the mountain! $170k and he couldn't pass $40k of V-10 truck and trailer!

Couldn't, or didn't want to? Those are 2 VERY different things. I've got a Cummins and a 9500 lbs travel trailer. I am sure I COULD tow in excess of 80 or 90 mph uphill in my rig... but I sure as heck don't WANT TO.

We went to Tennessee earlier this month, plenty of inclines coming through the Smokies. I could have easily passed a lot of trucks along the way... but I didn't want to pay for lower fuel economy, more heat in my tires, etc etc.

For diesel owners there is little controversy. It is generated by gas truck owners.

ppine wrote:
I bought a diesel Ford in 2002 which is the last of the 7.3 engines.
I have used it for everything. It is not only the best truck I have had, it is the best vehicle. It will pull anything, always has enough room and is very dependable. 23 mpg is the best so far.

It costs more up front. The operation costs are similar to a gas engine. The value of my truck is probably twice that of an equivalent gas powered truck with the same mileage. The economics have been a bonus.

That's a pretty tall claim that a man named sidecar flip would fuel you at high noon over!

There can't be 2 best trucks ever.......

On a more serious note, as was said many times in not just this thread, the proof of "financial justification" typically comes from owners who wish they had more power but have to justify spending only 20% less money for half the power.

CharlesinGA wrote:

Mortimer Brewster wrote:
There’s something to be said for having the right tool to do a job - even if it costs more money.

^^^THIS^^^

I cannot agree more.

Charles

Thats why I replaced my 12 CTD 2500 with a 2500 6.4 instead of an F150 HDPP.

Mortimer Brewster wrote:
There’s something to be said for having the right tool to do a job - even if it costs more money.

^^^THIS^^^

I cannot agree more.

Charles